Unhistorical HL 62 TRM engine was removed. Amongst other things, the too high horsepower difference between the stock and the elite engine caused very bad turnrate of the vehicle with the stock engine. The stock version of Marder II was buffed, which is important for tier 3 vehicles. It will be now easier to play for new players and the experience players can show off their skill on higher tier tech. The 50mm gun was deemed not to be appropriate and was removed, but at the same time attention was paid to other guns. In real life, the 76,2mm gun was worse in terms of penetration than the 75mm one (that’s why the German designers decided not to use the 76,2mm gun on Marder III). In patch 8.9, the difference between gun penetrations was made historical: at this moment the 75mm gun penetration is better than the 76,2mm one.

BT-7, Pz.Kpfw. I, Hotchkiss H35, D1, Cruiser Mk. I, Vickers Mk. E Type B, Jagdpanzer IV, Renault FT AC, Universal Carrier 2-pdr, Lorraine 40 t, Vickers Medium Mk. II, B1, Churchill VII, VK 30.01 (P) were all rebalanced, because these vehicles were not as good as the other vehicles of the same class and tier, that’s why it was decided to buff some of their characteristics.

Both vehicles had their characteristics significantly improved (the depression buff from -3 to -10 degrees). The gun also fires faster, but aims slower. Nevertheless it should be said that for a mobile vehicle with a gun that is not exactly the best for tier 6, rate of fire is more important than aim time. The engine recieved historical horsepower and became weaker, hitpoints were nerfed too, but the view range increased.

Some midtier artillery vehicles were rebalanced (slightly buffed) in connection with the reduction of their popularity.Apart from that, the shell velocit for SU-5, Bison and all tier 2 arties was increased.

It’s not that, it is stupid that they buff some tanks calling it ‘historical’, while keeping hell lot of more unhistorical for balancing reasons, like e.g. why Lee can use the hull 75 mm gun, while B1 must use the puny 47 mm turret one?

Not really. Daigensui was, in fact, bragging (whether or not he’s telling the truth is not relevant in this aspect), so any negative comments regarding his is 100% expected.

Now, if he would’ve said “Yeah, it was tough fighting it out with them, but in the end they accepted all the proof and arguments I’ve sent their way.”, or something similar, it would’ve appeared more friendly and less “HA! Thank _me_, you poor looser!”-y.

Daigensui is a vainly self-conceited piece of shit who believes she has involvement in every single change made in the game, and that it was HER who got it changed, when in fact numerous threads and posts were made about the Lorraine 40t’s historical gun depression. Not sure where her arrogance came from, but it’s really made me and many others dislike her. This is definitely visible over on the NA forums where I see post after post of hers downvoted into oblivion, because she has no concept of balance or game mechanics; despite her thinking otherwise.

I understand that she works with the Japanese tanks, as much as I dislike that. But really? If she had anything to do with the Lorraine’s gun depression change, it was only minor, or evidence stolen from someone else that was shown to WG.

BT-7, Pz.Kpfw. I, Hotchkiss H35, D1, Cruiser Mk. I, Vickers Mk. E Type B, Jagdpanzer IV, Renault FT AC, Universal Carrier 2-pdr, Lorraine 40 t, Vickers Medium Mk. II, B1, Churchill VII, VK 30.01 (P) were all rebalanced, because these vehicles were not as good as the other vehicles of the same class and tier, that’s why it was decided to buff some of their characteristics.two years to get past some of those turds and NOW they get buffed

VK30.01P was a good tank, now it’s an awesome tank. The front of the turret was virtually impregnable for most tier 6 tanks, now it will be even better as it will be able to use the new depression to aim over ridges instead of poking out behind corners.

I’m hoping there will be more of this once they admit they can provide separate camo patterns for each tank. The two French premiums can finally get their German camo patterns, the Indien Panzer can get Indian colors, and US tanks in Commonwealth service can get proper colors (Locust, Ram II).

Ram II is actually a Canadian tank used for training purposes by the Canadian and British armies during WW II, the only Rams that saw service were the Wasp II flamethrower variant, and the Sexton SPG developed using ram chassis which was used very effectively by the British forces.

Other stuff
-Top engine removed (20hp less horsepower), terrain resistance reduced and traverse increased in return
-Better agility in stock, but possibly slightly worse in elite configuration (cannot be tested in test server due lack of players)
-Better radio range (310m -> 550m) [now thats a buff, no longer having to worry about that when sniping!]

I do fear that everyone will jump to the Marder 38t and they will start nerfing the Marder 38t then, the only bad thing about the Marder 38t is its low penetration, thats its only disadvantage.
If you know where to aim or when to switch to gold ammo…..nuff said.

Was going to post this, thanks for not being the only person with eyes and a brain!

The Church VII with the 75mm and gun depression almost as good as a bloody Dicker Max sounds like the scariest damn thing ever. Not to mention the rest of the soft stat buffs and hitpoint buff. I think this finally has a good niche to fit against all the other extremely strong tier 7 Heavy competition!

There is a difference between making an existing vehicle that that didn’t mount a certain gun historical and making a proposed tank design ! AS HISTORICAL AS POSSIBLE !

Im sure you’d rather see WT like tech-trees where US line stops at the M4 Sherman and Tiger II’s slug it out with IS series tanks in the field, just rolling over everything else. Sounds like plenty of fun to me .. NOT.

Saying that something is changed because it wasn’t historical isn’t an explanation it’s an excuse it they dont change loads of stuff that isn’t historic they use historicity only when it pleases them. It’s not a valid reason to ch age something like balance purposes .
Also can you please ask why was 36.01 changed the way it was and not historicity bs please.
Thanks

No no i havent, they have in fact failed to point out what was wrong with it , kv1s for example is untouched but 36.01 nerf took everyone completely by surprise just because it was a fun tank not an op one.

For pretty much all practical intents and purposes it wasn’t even nerfed, dumbass. Oh and “I can play just fine” sounds terribly unconvincing coming from an Anonymous whinebitch who doesn’t even use his ingame nick so we could check.

2. How is HESH broken, from what I see, it’s the ultimate gamble. It’ll either do insane damage, or nearly none. Hell, on test I rolled 34 damage in the 183. 34 freaking damage.

3. The IS-3 lost much of it’s turret armor, so if you’re not staring one down, it’s much easier to kill now. And the main reason for the change in turret armor was the discovery of a different document that said they had grossly miscalculated the turret armor.

You are using the word historical in the wrong context. When devs say historical they mean they want to get it as close to real as possible in terms of vehicle realism, not gameplay realism. In the end game balance is the ultimate goal, no matter how historical you go. A historical game would be unplayable, so don’t whine when devs do something for the sake of game balance you guys are always crying so much about ..

An arty buff?….hell hath frozen over, judgement day is upon us!!! Lol its nice to see arty getting some love, I just wish I had any of the ones being buffed…how is tiger p? I have been considering buying it for a t8 to play in platoons

You do know american vehicle designations, do you ? T stands for Test, M stands for Massproduced. So in the end the M6 wouldn’t really have the M designation if it never left testing phase .. You don’t even have to look that up, it just needs 3 seconds brain activity

M-number basically means “officially accepted to service”. The military pretty much took one good look at the thing and decided it wasn’t worth the hassle of shipping overseas, so the smallish bunch that got built stayed Stateside to delight the young and old alike in publicity shows and the like.

Both vehicles had their characteristics significantly improved (the depression buff from -3 to -10 degrees). The gun also fires faster, but aims slower. Nevertheless it should be said that for a mobile vehicle with a gun that is not exactly the best for tier 6, rate of fire is more important than aim time. The engine recieved historical horsepower and became weaker, hitpoints were nerfed too, but the view range increased.

Aimtime vs RoF on a mobile tank. Don’t you think a tank that stops and go should have better aimtime than RoF?
Or is it supposed to not stop at all?